BEFORE THE TELANGANA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION : HYDERABAD. FA.NO.724 OF 2021 AGAINST ORDERS IN CC.NO.75 OF 2015, DISTRICT CONSUMER COMMISSION, KARIMNAGAR Between

1. The Branch Manager, LIC of India, Bellampalli Branch Office, Bellampally (P&M), Adilabad (D) – 504 251-Pincode.

2. The Divisional Manager, Divisional Office, LIC of India, 2-7-105, Jeevan Prakash, Near Dr.B.R.Ambedkar Stadium Road, Karimnagar (Post & Mandal and District) – 505 001.

……Appellants/Opp.Parties 1 & 2 And Nune Saritha @ Eraveni Kavitha, W/o.Late Ramesh, Aged about 27 years, Occ: Private Teacher, R/o.H.No.3-78/5A, Korkal Jangam Palli Village, Veenavanka Mandal, Karimnagar Dist.

……Respondent/Complainant Counsel for the Appellants/Opp.Parties: M/s.Thirumal Rao Mamidala Counsel for the Respondent/Complainant: Notice served QUORAM:

HON’BLE SMT.JUSTICE DR.G.RADHA RANI ……PRESIDENT &

HON’BLE SMT.R.S.RAJESHREE ……MEMBER (NON-JUDICIAL)

WEDNESDAY THE ELEVENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND TWENTY SIX ******

Order: (Per Smt.Dr.G.Radha Rani, Hon’ble President)

1. This appeal is filed by the Opposite Parties No.1 & 2 aggrieved by the order dated 01.10.2021 in CC.No.75/2015 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Karimnagar, Telangana State in allowing the complaint in part directing the Opposite Parties 1 & 2 jointly and severally liable to pay the Complainant, the sum assured Rs.2 lakhs along with entitled benefits covered under policy bearing No.684677664 after deducting unpaid premiums, if any, as on the date of death of the life assured with interest @ 9% p.a. from the date of filing of the complaint i.e., 27.02.2015 till its realization along with costs of Rs.5,000/- within one month from the date of receipt of the order.

2. For the sake of convenience, the parties are hereinafter referred as Complainant and Opposite Parties 1 & 2, as arrayed in the complaint before the District Forum.

3. The case of the Complainant in brief was that:

The Complainant was the nominee and wife of late Ramesh, who during his lifetime obtained several life insurance policies from Opposite Parties under Salary Saving Scheme vide policy bearing No.684677664. As per the terms and conditions of the policy, in case of death of policy holder, the nominee was entitled to receive the death benefits covered under the policies. Unfortunately, the Complainant’s husband died on 12.09.2006. After the death of her husband, the Complainant approached the Opposite Parties along with relevant documents and requested the Opposite Parties to pay the death benefits covered under the policy. The policy bearing No.684677664 (Jeevan Mitra Triple Cover Policy) was for an assured sum of Rs.2,00,000/-. The Opposite Parties promised to settle the claim in near future. But they failed to settle the claim even after repeated requests made by the Complainant. As a last resort, the Complainant got issued legal notice through her counsel on 16.01.2015 to the Opposite Parties demanding to pay the entitled benefits covered under the policy. The same was served on them on 19.01.2015. Though they have received the notice, the Opposite Parties neither paid the amount covered under the policies nor repudiated the claim. Hence, the Complainant having no other remedy filed the complaint. The cause of action was shown as arose from 19.01.2015 when the legal notice was served on the Opposite Parties.

4. The Opposite Parties 1 & 2 filed counter contending that the complaint was filed after the expiry of limitation period under Section-24A of Consumer Protection Act. The date of death of the life assured was 12.09.2006. The Complainant filed the complaint 9 years after the date of death of the life assured i.e., after the date of cause of action arisen. Hence complaint was not maintainable. The Opposite Parties further contended that it was very difficult to establish the exact cause of death, as suicide clause was operative during the first year of the policy. They further contended that the polic